I'm relatively new to Hasselblad. I wanted to go with medium format so I rented a Fuji GFX100S and a Hasselblad X2D. There were a few reasons I went with Hasselblad but a big one was the HNCS. I just loved the colors straight out of the X2D.

But once I owned a Hasselblad and had to start thinking about processing images I found myself confused. There's this thing called Phocus, but is it necessary? I'm already proficient with LR and LR seems to understand both 3fr and fff files so do I really need to go through Phocus? Online I found some workflows recommending camera->Phocus->editing in Phocus->TIFF->LR. But some Youtubers suggested going camera->Phocus to create FFF files->LR and doing editing in LR. And some even recommended going straight into LR. A thread on Reddit that I've seen referenced many times suggests that the difference between Phocus and LR is "negligible" so it's easier to just go to LR.

I experimented on my own and found what has been described here (and elsewhere) - to maintain HNCS you have to use Phocus and export as 16-bit TIFF to work in LR. As I mentioned up front I chose Hasselblad because of HNCS, so going straight to LR is not an option and that's fine. I just don't understand why it took so much searching and experimentation to figure that out. Seems like the workflow for preserving HNCS should be clearly documented.

I know some people don't like Phocus but I don't have a problem with it. I appreciate its simplicity even if it is "clunky" compared to LR or C1. As a hobbyist I don't have the time or desire to tweak every single possible parameter of a shot so I appreciate that Phocus is more "limited" than LR. I find that Phocus meets 90% of my needs and the other 10% I export to TIFF and finish in LR.

As you have discovered, both LR and Phocus can produce acceptable images.  Use whichever makes you happy and produces prints/images that you desire.  If Phocus meets 90% of your needs, that's pretty darned good.  Sounds like you have become proficient with both programs.

If you really want to keep HNCS in ALL cases, the only way is Phocus. If you want to go very, very close to HNCS (I mean for most cases, except 1 or 2% images with complex lighting) but benefit from a better software, use Lightroom. You can also use Phocus to convert your images into TIFF, and then edit these TIFF with Lightroom. But TIFFs are known as less flexible than RAWs as far as editing is concerned.
I would say : use the process and the software which look better and user-friendly to you.

With Phocus for Desktop you have to go via fff files, you have no other choice.
3FR camera RAW files are converted to fff by importing them in Phocus Desktop.
But don't forget that fff post-processing in Phocus cannot be read by any other software, also LR and PS

With Phocus Mobile 2 you can process partially 3FR camera RAW files. The processing is included when exporting JPEG's in Phocus Mobile.
When importing Mobile processed 3FR files in Phocus Desktop, a tick box opens and you have the choice with or without previous Mobile processing before converting in  fff format. But also in this case LR and PS are not able to read saved FR3 or fff processed in Phocus Mobile.

On Hasselblads youtube channel you can find multiple webinars about Phocus and HCNS.  They are not as comprehensive as a Best Practices PDF (which doesn't exist as far as I know), but informative nonetheless.  Between that and the user manual, you can figure out most of it.

The thing with Lightroom seems to be that Hasselblad worked with Adobe to tweak their engine for good results.  But it's still Adobes generic engine, so no secret magic that can't also happen with some of the other manufacturers cameras.  In Phocus, Hasselblad has full control over the processing, and makes use of it to a higher degree.

Quote from: JCM-Photos on January 06, 2025, 01:05:49 AMWith Phocus for Desktop you have to go via fff files, you have no other choice.
3FR camera RAW files are converted to fff by importing them in Phocus Desktop.
But don't forget that fff post-processing in Phocus cannot be read by any other software, also LR and PS

With Phocus Mobile 2 you can process partially 3FR camera RAW files. The processing is included when exporting JPEG's in Phocus Mobile.
When importing Mobile processed 3FR files in Phocus Desktop, a tick box opens and you have the choice with or without previous Mobile processing before converting in  fff format. But also in this case LR and PS are not able to read saved FR3 or fff processed in Phocus Mobile.

Adobe can read FFF or 3FR files regardless of whether they were processed, but you will see only the original raw file, without any processing.

Quote from: hasselmarc on January 06, 2025, 07:23:59 AMOn Hasselblads youtube channel you can find multiple webinars about Phocus and HCNS.  They are not as comprehensive as a Best Practices PDF (which doesn't exist as far as I know), but informative nonetheless.  Between that and the user manual, you can figure out most of it.

The thing with Lightroom seems to be that Hasselblad worked with Adobe to tweak their engine for good results.  But it's still Adobes generic engine, so no secret magic that can't also happen with some of the other manufacturers cameras.  In Phocus, Hasselblad has full control over the processing, and makes use of it to a higher degree.

Yes, I discovered both the HCNS webinar and Phocus series of videos. Both incredibly useful and I strongly recommend them to everyone with a digital Hasselblad!

Quote from: tenmangu81 on January 04, 2025, 11:55:45 PMIf you really want to keep HNCS in ALL cases, the only way is Phocus. If you want to go very, very close to HNCS (I mean for most cases, except 1 or 2% images with complex lighting) but benefit from a better software, use Lightroom. You can also use Phocus to convert your images into TIFF, and then edit these TIFF with Lightroom. But TIFFs are known as less flexible than RAWs as far as editing is concerned.
I would say : use the process and the software which look better and user-friendly to you.

Yes, it is possible to get close to HNCS in LR but it takes work and it's never quite the same. I prefer not to do the work if I don't have to. So that means working in Phocus. It works for me most of the time.

Second, I discovered what you said about TIFFs being less flexible. In particular, I was disappointed that I couldn't use LR's AI denoiser on a TIFF. I guess it's only trained on RAW images.

Quote from: errissa on January 07, 2025, 01:26:39 PM

Quote from: tenmangu81 on January 04, 2025, 11:55:45 PMIf you really want to keep HNCS in ALL cases, the only way is Phocus. If you want to go very, very close to HNCS (I mean for most cases, except 1 or 2% images with complex lighting) but benefit from a better software, use Lightroom. You can also use Phocus to convert your images into TIFF, and then edit these TIFF with Lightroom. But TIFFs are known as less flexible than RAWs as far as editing is concerned.
I would say : use the process and the software which look better and user-friendly to you.

Yes, it is possible to get close to HNCS in LR but it takes work and it's never quite the same. I prefer not to do the work if I don't have to. So that means working in Phocus. It works for me most of the time.

Second, I discovered what you said about TIFFs being less flexible. In particular, I was disappointed that I couldn't use LR's AI denoiser on a TIFF. I guess it's only trained on RAW images.

There is no additional work for me when working with LR. Be careful not to use the "generic" Adobe profiles, but only "Camera Standard", after having chosen the right settings in "Preferences -> Presets". You should mention your Hasselblad camera in the "Camera" field. By choosing the generic Adobe profiles, you could be very far from the Phocus HNCS rendering.

Quote from: tenmangu81 on January 08, 2025, 06:02:03 AM

Quote from: errissa on January 07, 2025, 01:26:39 PM

Quote from: tenmangu81 on January 04, 2025, 11:55:45 PMIf you really want to keep HNCS in ALL cases, the only way is Phocus. If you want to go very, very close to HNCS (I mean for most cases, except 1 or 2% images with complex lighting) but benefit from a better software, use Lightroom. You can also use Phocus to convert your images into TIFF, and then edit these TIFF with Lightroom. But TIFFs are known as less flexible than RAWs as far as editing is concerned.
I would say : use the process and the software which look better and user-friendly to you.

Yes, it is possible to get close to HNCS in LR but it takes work and it's never quite the same. I prefer not to do the work if I don't have to. So that means working in Phocus. It works for me most of the time.

Second, I discovered what you said about TIFFs being less flexible. In particular, I was disappointed that I couldn't use LR's AI denoiser on a TIFF. I guess it's only trained on RAW images.

There is no additional work for me when working with LR. Be careful not to use the "generic" Adobe profiles, but only "Camera Standard", after having chosen the right settings in "Preferences -> Presets". You should mention your Hasselblad camera in the "Camera" field. By choosing the generic Adobe profiles, you could be very far from the Phocus HNCS rendering.

Well... that helped! I thought I had done that already but it turns out I was importing as "Adobe Default." There are still differences (as expected) comparing JPGs exported from both Phocus and LR on the same image without any adjustments but the differences are more subtle.

Phocus lens corrections are superior to Adobe, they use much more lens datas to build the corrections algorythms.

Quote from: JCM-Photos on January 20, 2025, 06:03:26 PMPhocus lens corrections are superior to Adobe, they use much more lens datas to build the corrections algorythms.

True. However, now that Hasselblad has figured out how to output a raw file form Phocus Mobile WITH the new Hasselblad AI Denoise applied and preserved in ACR and LR, I don't see why the same can't be done wit hthe lens corrections as well.